The Time Constraint in Conference Interpreting: Simultaneous vs. Consecutive

• Authors: Ewa Gumul , Andrzej Łyda
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The present paper focuses on the concept of time constraint in interpreting. The main aim of the study is to compare the two modes of interpreting, i.e. consecutive and simultaneous in terms of the temporal load imposed by the operations constituting each of them. The discussion centres on the issues of external pacing and processing capacity management, the two focal points of The Time Constraint. The paper also examines a range of strategies interpreters resort to in order to minimise the impact of time pressure in both CI and SI, such as EVS regulation, economy of expression, text-editing strategies, and notation techniques.

Keywords

EN

time constraint; simultaneous interpreting; consecutive interpreting; external pacing; processing capacity; interpreting strategies; EVS regulation; economy of expression; text-editing strategies; note taking

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2007
• Volume: 5
• Pages: 165-183

Dates

published

2007-01-01

online

2007-12-18

Contributors

author

Ewa Gumul

• University of Silesia

author

Andrzej Łyda

• University of Silesia

References

• Agrifoglio, M. 2004. "Sight translation and interpreting: A comparative analysis of constraints and failures". Interpreting 6(1), 43-67.
• Al-Khanji, R, S. El-Shiyab and R. Hussein. 2000. "On the Use of Compensatory Strategies in Simultaneous Interpreting". Meta 45(3), 548-557.
• Anderson, L. 1994. "Simultaneous Interpretation: Contextual and Translation Aspects". In: Lambert S. and B. Moser-Mercer (eds.), 101-120.
• Arabski, J., E. Borkowska and A. Łyda (eds). 2005. Czas w języku i kulturze. Katowice: Para.
• Baddeley, A. D., Lewis, V. and Vallar, G. 1984. "Exploring the articulatory loop". Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 36A, 233-252.[Crossref][WoS]
• Barik, H. C. 1994. "A description of various types of omissions and errors of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation", In: Lambert, S. and B. Moser-Mercer (eds), 121-137.
• Danks, J., G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain, and M. K. McBeath (eds). 1997. Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. London: Sage Publications.
• Darò, V. and Fabbro, F. 1994. "Verbal memory during simultaneous interpretation: Effects of phonological interference". Applied Linguistics 15(1), 365-381.[Crossref]
• Davy, D. 1966. Advanced English Course. London: Linguaphone.
• Garzone, G. 2002. "Quality and norms in interpretation". In: Garzone, G. and M. Viezzi (eds), 107-119.
• Garzone, G. and M. Viezzi (eds). 2002. Interpreting in the 21st Century. Challenges and opportunities. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Gerver, D. 1969 [2002] "The Effects of Source Language Presentation Rate on the Performance of Simultaneous Conference Interpreters", In: Pöchhacker, F. and M. Shlesinger (eds), 52-66.
• Gerver, D. and H. Wallace Sinaiko (eds). 1978. Language Interpretation and Communication. New York and London: Plenum Press.
• Gile, D. 1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.[WoS]
• Gile, D. 1997. "Conference Interpreting as a Cognitive Management Problem", In: Danks, J., G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain, and M. K. McBeath (eds), 196-214.
• Gile, D. 2001. "The Role of Consecutive in Interpreter Training: A Cognitive View". AIIC. Communicate 14, (http://www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm/page377.htm).
• Gumul, E. 2004. Cohesion in Interpreting, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Silesia.
• Gumul, E. 2005. "EVS: czynnik czasu w tłumaczeniu symultanicznym", In: Arabski, J. E. Borkowska and A. Łyda (eds), 176-183.
• Gumul, E. 2007. "Explicitation in Conference Interpreting", In: Thelen M. and B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds), 449-456.
• Gumul, E. Forthcoming. "Conjunctive Cohesive Markers: Translational Shifts in English-Polish SI and CI", In: Thelen M. and B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds).
• Hatim, B. and I. Mason. 1997. Translator as a Communicator. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Herbert, J. 1952. The Interpreter's Handbook. Geneve: Librairie de L'Université Georg.
• Hung, E. (ed.) 2002. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4. Building Bridges. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Jones, R. 1998. Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.
• Kalina, S. 2002. "Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites: A framework for a comprehensive view", In: Garzone, G. and M. Viezzi (eds.) 121-130.
• Kirchhoff, H. 1976 [2002]. "Simultaneous Interpreting: Interdependence of Variables in the Interpreting Process, Interpreting Models and Interpreting Strategies", In: Pöchhacker, F. and M. Shlesinger (eds.) 110-119.
• Kohn, K. and S. Kalina, 1996. "The Strategic Dimension of Interpreting". Meta 41(1), 118-138.
• Kurz, I. 1993 [2002]. "Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User Groups", In: Pöchhacker, F. and M. Shlesinger (eds), 312-324.
• Lambert, S. and B. Moser-Mercer (eds). 1994. Bridging the Gap. Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Le Ny, J-F. 1978. "Introductory report: Semantic aspects". International Journal of Psycholinguistics 5(2), 7-16.
• Lederer, M. 1978. "Simultaneous Interpretation: Units of Meaning and Other Features", In: Gerver, D. and H. Wallace Sinaiko (eds), 323-332.
• Łyda, A. 2004. "On causal connectives in English-Polish simultaneous and consecutive interpreting". Linguistica Silesiana 25, 103-116.
• Łyda, A. and E. Gumul. 2002. "Cohesion in Interpreting", In: Stanulewicz, D. (ed), 349-356.
• Matysek, H. 1989. Handbuch der Notizentechnik für Dolmetscher: Ein Weg zur sprachunabhängigen Notation. Heidelberg: J. Groos.
• Mead, P. 2000. "Control of pauses by trainee interpreters in their A and B languages", The Interpreters' Newsletter 10, 89-102.
• Moser, P. 1996. "Expectations of users of conference interpretation". Interpreting 1(2), 145-178.
• Oléron, P. and H. Nanpon. 1964. "Recherches sur la traduction simultanée". Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 62-1, 73-94.
• Pöchhacker, F. 2002. "Researching interpreting quality". In: Garzone, G. and M. Viezzi (eds), 95-106.
• Pöchhacker, F. and M. Shlesinger (eds). 2002. The Interpreting Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge.
• Riccardi, A. 2002. "Evaluation in Interpretation: Macrocriteria and Microcriteria", In: Hung, E. (ed.), 115-126.
• Rozan, J. F. 2002. Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting. Kraków: Tertium.
• Seleskovitch, D. 1978. Interpreting for International Conferences. Problems of Language and Communication. Washington: Library of Congress.
• Stanulewicz, D. (ed). 2002. PASE Papers in Language Studies. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
• Thelen, M. and B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds). 2007. Translation and Meaning. Part 7. Maastricht: Department of Translation and Interpreting, Maastricht School of International Communication, Zuyd University.
• Thelen, M. and B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (eds). Forthcoming. Translation and Meaning. Part 8. Maastricht: Department of Translation and Interpreting, Maastricht School of International Communication, Zuyd University.
• Van Hoof, H. 1962. Théorie et pratique de la traduction. Munich: Hueber.
• Viaggio, S. 2002. "The quest for optimal relevance: The need to equip students with a pragmatic compass", In: Garzone, G. and M. Viezzi (eds), 229-244.
• Wei, L. 2002. "Positive Transfer: A Neuropsychological Understanding of Interpreting and the Implications for Interpreter Training". Translation Journal 6, 3 (http://accurapid.com/journal/21interpret.htm).
• Yagi, S. M. 2000. "Studying Style in Simultaneous Interpretation". Meta 45(3), 520-547.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10015-007-0007-1